We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Shame of Britain. Young shredded in inter-generational economic meat grinder
Comments
-
Graham_Devon wrote: »I'm certainly not disagreeing, just pointing out that when the increases are put across in the context of "2.7x" it really doesn't mean much and makes things look much better than reality.
The actual figures though, which make up that 2.7x you referred to paint a completely different picture. It's the percentage problem we all come across so often!
I posted those figure because some on asked.
Why do you think it makes thing look good it shows that prices are a third higher. Prices are high just not the 3 or 4x people try to claim.0 -
It depends where you want to buy just like now but a number of things to consider...
- House prices were very low due to the large number of distressed sellers and the housing crisis in the 90s.
- House prices were undervalued compared to now.
- Salaries haven't kept up with the rise in house prices.
- House prices are dependent on supply and demand, the market price is what people pay.
Focusing exclusively on the price of houses tells you very little on why they have risen so much or if they are good value or not.
Exactly what do you base that on?0 -
In London prices have increased 4 or 5 fold since 1989.
As I bought in 1989 and have recently had my house valued I can say the value of my house has increased 5x. And from memory, I would say until around 1995 was in negative equity when house prices fell around 20%. There is no way I could afford to buy it now as a first time buyer even thought I earn considerably more now.0 -
JencParker wrote: »As I bought in 1989 and have recently had my house valued I can say the value of my house has increased 5x. And from memory, I would say the first until around 1995 was in negative equity when house prices fell around 20%. There is no way I could afford to buy it now as a first time buyer.
According to Land Reg London prices have increased 4.3x since 1995 so your house was not typical.0 -
According to Land Reg London prices have increased 4.3x since 1995 so your house was not typical.
Areas in can London vary considerably, some areas become more fashionable as people are priced out of good areas and so prices rise. I live in an area that has always been expensive. Regardless of if the increase is just over the average, it is still considerably more than the increase in wages.0 -
JencParker wrote: »Areas in can London vary considerably, some areas become more fashionable as people are priced out of good areas and so prices rise. I live in an area that has always been expensive. Regardless of if the increase is just over the average, it is still considerably more than the increase in wages.
True some of the areas that are nice now you were pretty bad in the 70s. Some nice areas are not so nice now. But the population in London has increased considerably since 1989 and there is a lot of money in London.0 -
Simple logic that seems very lacking with some on this forum...JencParker wrote: »Exactly what do you base that on?0 -
JencParker wrote: »As I bought in 1989 and have recently had my house valued I can say the value of my house has increased 5x. And from memory, I would say until around 1995 was in negative equity when house prices fell around 20%. There is no way I could afford to buy it now as a first time buyer even thought I earn considerably more now.
Where is your house, how much did you earn, what do you earn now, how much did you borrow?
It's why people tend to use recognised indices - it saves us from having to rely upon your memory of your house prices changes since you purchased it and only partial relevant information0 -
So it's gone from 1 person to 2 people to get a mortgage. In the old days one could stay at home and raise the kid/s
You've got that completely the wrong way round. In the past it was not normal for most women to work, so people could only spend one salary on a mortgage. Once double-income couples started to become the norm. this drove up house prices to match, so it was people choosing to work that drove up prices, not prices being driven up that caused women to need to work.0 -
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards